2017 QCCQ 5123, 2017 QCCQ 5123

Protection de la jeunesse — 172313 2017 QCCQ 5123 COURT OF QUÉBEC CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF [...] « Youth Division » N° : 525-41-032232-175 DATE : March 21, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE FRANÇOIS STE-MARIE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ DIRECTOR OF YOUTH PROTECTION and X Born on [...], 2000 Adolescent and A mother ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT

Section 38 of the Youth Protection Act (R.S.Q. c. P-34.1) ______________________________________________________________________ Warning : The Youth Protection Act prohibits the publication or broadcast of information allowing a child or the child’s parents to be identified. Every person who contravenes this provision is liable to a fine (sections 11.2, 11.2.1 and 135 Y.P.A.). [ 1 ] In accordance with the requirements of

section 90 of the Youth Protection Act , the Court hereby confirms and gives the reasons for the decision rendered from the bench at the hearing held on March 21, 2017.

Introduction [ 2 ] The Director of Youth Protection alleges that the adolescent exhibits serious behavioural disturbances (having a conflictual relationship with the mother, not respecting house rules and curfew, being defiant towards the mother’s authority, not keeping her mother aware of her whereabouts, shoplifting, running away). [ 3 ] On February 17, 2017, immediate protective measures were invoked and the adolescent was placed in a rehabilitation centre. [ 4 ] On February 20, 2017, the Tribunal extended the application of the immediate protective measures. [ 5 ] On February 24, 2017, the Tribunal ordered the provisional compulsory foster care of the adolescent in a rehabilitation centre. [ 6 ] Today, the Director recommends that the adolescent remain placed in a rehabilitation centre for a period of six months and that support measures be provided to the family for a period of one year. [ 7 ] The mother and the adolescent are in agreement with the proposed plan.

Question in litigation [ 8 ] Are the proposed measures respecting the adolescent’s rights and her best interest? Context and Analysis [ 9 ] From December 2014 until January 2016, the adolescent was followed by the Director of Youth Protection and by the Court of Quebec, youth division. [ 10 ] On January 28, 2016, the youth protection file was closed. The adolescent’s behavioural problems have been deteriorating

since. [ 11 ] The mother reports the following about the adolescent’s behaviour: • she has not been respecting the house rules; • she has not been respecting curfew; • she has not been informing her of her whereabouts in the community; • she ran the phone bill up over 1200 $; • she has been suspended at school; • she has been shoplifting. [ 12 ] The adolescent admits most of the alleged facts except that she defies her mother’s authority and that her mother is unaware of her whereabouts in the community. [ 13 ] At the beginning of February 2017, the adolescent was kicked out of the house.

The adolescent went to reside with her boyfriend. [ 14 ] On February 17, 2017, the adolescent was caught shoplifting at The Bay. The adolescent lied to the police officer involved in the incident.

The mother was contacted but she refused to have her daughter returned home. [ 15 ] On the same date, immediate protective measures were invoked and the adolescent was entrusted to a rehabilitation centre. [ 16 ] On February 20, 2017, the Tribunal extended the application of the immediate protective measures. [ 17 ] On February 24, 2017, the Tribunal ordered the provisional compulsory foster care of the adolescent in a rehabilitation centre. [ 18 ] Since, the adolescent has been attending school regularly and respecting the rules and expectations from the rehabilitation centre. [ 19 ] The adolescent failed three drug tests.

The results indicated that the adolescent had consumed marijuana. [ 20 ] On March 14, the adolescent was suspended for one day from school due to her involvement in a physical altercation. [ 21 ] The adolescent’s first option is not to be placed in a rehabilitation centre but her mother is of the opinion that she still needs rehabilitation and that a continuation of the adolescent’s placement is required. More time is needed to work on the adolescent’s behaviour and on the mother/daughter relationship.

THEREFORE AND FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: [ 22 ] GRANTS the motion; [ 23 ] DECLARES that the security or the development of the adolescent is endangered (

section 38

f) and b) 1 o iii of the Youth Protection Act ); [ 24 ] ORDERS that the adolescent remain in a rehabilitation centre for a period of six months; [ 25 ] ORDERS that the adolescent and her mother continue to collaborate and follow through with the recommendations made by the Director of Youth Protection; [ 26 ] ORDERS that the adolescent attend school on a daily basis unless justified by a medical note; [ 27 ] ORDERS that a person working for a Child and Youth Protection Centre provide aid, counsel and assistance to the adolescent and her family; [ 28 ] THE WHOLE for a period of one year; [ 29 ] ENTRUSTS the situation of X to the Director of Youth Protection, who shall then see that the measures are carried out. __________________________________ François Ste-Marie, J.C.Q.

Signed on March 28, 2017 /cd Ms. Christine Waldvogel Counsel for the Director of Youth Protection Mtre Alec Fafard Counsel for the adolescent Date of hearing: March 21, 2017